From: Lloyd Ardoin (lloyd@TheWizKid.biz)
Date: Mon Oct 20 2008 - 21:59:55 ARST
Hi Charles,
I too was a 'top down' guy and that is definitely not the best
approach. I have attempted the lab a few times now and I can honestly
tell you that would not be my recommendation. Not sure if you have
access to IE's web site and material but Brian Dennis does a good
webinar on lab strategy. The lab material may or may not be in any
specific order. Just to give you a very specific example or two. For
example you could be asked to configure vlans on the switches and do
some type of tweaking to spanning-tree but a few sections over you may
be asked to set up MSTP so if you don't read ahead you will have to
redo your work. Another example I ran into on a WB lab is where they
ask you to set up frame relay hub and spoke scenario but then later in
the IGP (EIGRP) section they want you to use authentication using key
chains and have the hub use different keys with each spoke which can
only be done with virtual-templates interfaces (PPPoFR) so now you
have to redo all the interfaces because you didn't read ahead. This
was really hard for me to because like you I like top down. I have
heard some people suggest that they do only the tasks initially that
will get them IGP reachability that 'golden moment' so to speak and
then they go back and do the STP tweaking, authentication, etc. IE
suggests reading the lab all the way though, as does Cisco by the way
and making a column list of each task with a task number, points
column and a notes column. Use this to keep track of your
accomplishments. I personally think this is good advice. Based on my
experience so far I believe you have to be able to complete the 'core'
technologies in the first 3 - 4 hours successfully (that means
correctly!) to pass the lab. The other thing that I have been weak on
is verification. When you complete a task how do you verify it's
correctness? If you read the comments on Cisco's web site about the
LAB they are very specific about that during the lab exam. You should
verify as you complete each task no matter how significant or
insignificant you think it may be. My other suggestion is to do a
good layer 3 drawing that you can rely on to spot potential problems
like split horizen, routing loops, a need to use a virtual-link if you
happen to get OSPF and have a situation that requires it, etc. May
sound silly but I think you should practice doing those drawings and
get very comfortable with doing that. Another issue I have is skim
reading which can cause a problem with misinterpretation or missing a
key word that may be significant. I do a lot of reading and have a
tendency to do that and during the lab a single word can make a
difference in interpretation. Some have suggested using your finger to
point to each word as you read the question which may help to slow you
down and give pause to the meaning of the task. And not to sound trite
but from the NMC group they will say "make no assumptions, know all
your options". Sounds simple enough but it really isn't. We get used
to configuring a solution one or two ways and we are not aware of
another way to resolve it which makes us vulnerable to a miss-step and
the solution that they are looking for! In my work I interact with two
AT&T engineers on a fairly consistent basis and they are both
incredibly intelligent and understand the technologies very well and I
know that one of them has attempted the lab 3 times and not passed so
strategy and organization can play a very significant role in your lab
attempt.
HTH,
Lloyd
On Oct 20, 2008, at 5:56 PM, Charles Henson wrote:
> I'm about a month out from my first attempt. I am at the point where
> I'm
> completing most labs comfortably but I still am trying to work on
> improving
> my time. My question is this: One area I'm not too great on is
> identifying
> the issues ahead of time. I tend to drag my feet thru the lab and
> when I get
> to something that influences how I set things up an hour ago, I work
> thru it
> and keep going. I understand that it's not effecient, that's just my
> method.
> Page 1, Page 2, etc. I'm just curious to hear from other people if
> they have
> had this approach and survived or if the key to passing in a timely
> manner
> really depends on your ability to forecast problems when you
> initially read
> thru your instructions first thing in the morning. My goal for the
> next
> month - "Strategery"
>
> Anyone have any thoughts? Experiences?
>
> --
> Charles
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 01 2008 - 15:35:21 ARST